On Fri, 19 Sep 2008, Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com wrote:
BTW, http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt
does not absolutely require including an email address (if you give
some other contact method, such as postal address or telephone
number), and there are RFCs that don't include it (e.g RFC 3718
from 2004; perhaps others exist, too).
There are also cases wheres where contacting the author would require
somewhat unconventional methods, e.g. RFC 3542...
What disturbs me as a reviewer is when a draft does not include email
address(es) of authors or where comments should be sent. I'm having
difficulty figuring out the usefulness of such a draft.
FWIW, IMHO, any spam argument seems bogus. Anyone actively
participating is already leaving such an email address footprint all
over the net (including elsewhere in the IETF) that a) they already
need protection mechanisms, and b) obfuscation methods (if used)
should be reasonable.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf